Statement Responding to Concerns Regarding the "Attorney Regulation Act Amendment Opinion Collection" Initiative

In response to recent doubts regarding our organization being invited by the Executive Yuan to discuss the establishment of a "discussion platform" for amending the Attorney Regulation Act, followed by the decision to co-organize questionnaires and online forums with the Executive Yuan (the Ministry of Justice subsequently withdrew), vTaiwan, and our organization to gather opinions, as well as an upcoming consultation meeting scheduled for 7:00 PM on May 4 at the Executive Yuan's "Seventh Meeting Room," we hereby issue the following statement:

1. The needs and hardships of the people are the supreme principles of the Judicial Reform Foundation's advocacy and action:

• The reason our organization accepted the invitation from the Executive Yuan and was willing to cooperate with vTaiwan to establish a platform for issues related to the amendment of the Attorney Regulation Act is our belief that 2016 is truly a critical year for the judicial reform movement. If issues related to the legal profession (our organization has proposed "ten major dimensions" of issues) can be fully discussed and opinions exchanged through this platform, we believe there will surely be significant improvements in the legal system. In particular, given the considerable gap in the rule of law between urban and rural areas in Taiwan, if we can refine the legal profession system to further narrow the gap in rule-of-law resources between urban and rural areas and deepen rule-of-law education, we believe this will also be a blessing to the people.
• Some commentators have questioned our organization's action this time as having only a single purpose, which is a major misunderstanding. Our expectations for the reform of the legal profession do not stop here; we even more earnestly hope that the issues under the "ten major dimensions" proposed by our organization will attract widespread attention and importance from the legal community.

2. Constructing a robust organizational structure for the legal profession has always been a high expectation of our organization, and presumably of the legal community as well:

• How the bar association should be structured depends entirely on the mission and vision set for attorneys. Whether it is attorney self-governance, attorney training and capacity building, attorney discipline and self-regulation, or issues such as advocating for judicial human rights and deepening Taiwan's rule of law, attorneys bear an unshirkable duty. A strong and powerful organizational structure for the legal profession is the key factor in transforming individual guerrilla forces into collective combat energy. This has always been our organization's heartfelt expectation for the organization of bar associations, and we believe it is also the high expectation of the legal community.
• Our organization's cooperative project with the Executive Yuan this time plays the role of organizing opinions from all sides, establishing communication channels, transparentizing the discussion process, and broadening the participation of all attorneys and the people. Regarding potential changes to the bar association organization, we neither deem it appropriate nor have we, in fact, adopted any predetermined stance in advance.

3. With a substantial increase in newly admitted attorneys, a platform should be established to listen to their opinions:

• The massive admission of attorneys in recent years has created new types of practice dilemmas for lawyers, urgently requiring all attorneys to cast aside prejudices and suspicions, and to maximize the number of participants in discussions under the format of "expanding direct participation of new attorneys, information transparency, and open deliberation." We believe that with the rational characteristics and sharp critical thinking skills of attorneys, after full communication and the gradual formation of consensus, the most appropriate system can surely be determined. In reality, the practical dilemmas of new attorneys require a platform where they can fully express their opinions; otherwise, in a situation of poor communication, even a system with good intentions may lead to negative effects due to poor communication.
• This is also the main reason why our organization believes in the advantages of vTaiwan's "deliberative system" meetings and is willing to cooperate with them. Regardless of whether this platform can continue to operate in the future, our organization also strongly suggests that this approach should be considered as a model for the Taiwan Bar Association and various local bar associations to discuss issues.

4. Questionnaires, opinion collection, and the meeting on May 4 are not an end, but the beginning of opening discussion and dialogue:

• Many seniors have expressed concern that the questionnaires are overly simplistic or suspected of misleading attorneys, and consequently some have suggested refusing to fill them out. In reality, when the content of the questionnaire was initially discussed jointly by the Executive Yuan, the Ministry of Justice, and our organization, such potential omissions and the inability to be exhaustive were also discussed; the original intention was to avoid making the questionnaire overly lengthy and inevitably having to make trade-offs.
• To remedy this potential omission, an open discussion forum was established to widely solicit open opinions. In recent days, the presentation of both positive and negative opinions from all sides has constituted very meaningful discourse; if all of these can be published in the discussion forum, we believe it can also deepen the discussion quality of the issues, which is precisely the purpose of establishing the open discussion forum.
• The consultation meeting to be held at 7:00 PM on May 4 is neither a "one-off" meeting nor a meeting based on a "majority rules everything" voting model, but rather a meeting aimed at gradually clarifying issues and building consensus. If there are any doubts due to unfamiliarity with the meeting format, one can refer to the rich content on the vTaiwan website.

Finally, our organization's mission is to unite the strength of all citizens to continuously promote reforms in order to build a fair, just, and trustworthy judiciary for the people. Every advocacy effort and action strives to take this mission as its starting point and destination. Over the past twenty-one years, while we dare not claim that every action has been flawless, we believe we have not strayed from this original intention, and we sincerely welcome scrutiny and advice from all sectors of society.

Press Contact

Kao Jung-chih, CEO of the Judicial Reform Foundation 02-25231178